On 8.4.2011 18:03, Mister IT Guru wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 08:58 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Keith Keller
>> <kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> wrote:
>>> Hi all!
>>>>>> We've seen quite a few references on the list to "100% binary
>>> compatibility with upstream". What I am curious about is, how precisely
>>> is this determined? All the ways I can think of for comparing how two
>>> systems might work seem flawed in some way (e.g., using some sort of
>>> checksum; unit testing; verifying build parameters). I did some
>>> searches both at centos.org and google, but couldn't find anything
>>> specific about the test(s) used to determine compatibility.
>>>> In this FAQ:
>>>>http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess>>>> "Once built ... we use the tmverifyrpms against it from here:
>>>>http://mirror.centos.org/centos-4/4/build/distro/ "
>>>> Akemi
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>>CentOS at centos.org>>http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos>>> Thanks Keith, good question, that should have been on my list of
> "Questions to ask about CentOS building process", and thanks to Akemi
> for a quick answer :)
Given that its answered in a FAQ one could argue that it was not a good
question.
--
Kind Regards, Markus Falb
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110408/84977787/attachment.bin